Journal of Cleaner Production 181 (2018) 166e177

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Review

Hybrid nuclear-renewable energy systems: A review

Siddharth Suman
Independent Researcher, Patna, 800 020, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Climate change and energy security have emerged as the biggest concerns of the present century.
Available online 1 February 2018 Renewable energy sources are not continuous, dependent upon geographical location as well as climatic
conditions, and require a very large land footprint. Future of nuclear energy is also uncertain because of
Keywords: public apprehensions and subsequent government policies. To overcome the issues derailing these two
Renewable virtually carbon-free energy sources, a new hybrid or integrated nuclear-renewable energy system is
Nuclear
being proposed and seen as an attractive option. Such integrated energy systems are conceived as a
Solar
nuclear power reactor coupled with renewable energy generation and industrial processes that may
Energy
Climate
simultaneously tackle the concerns regarding grid flexibility, climate change, energy security, optimal
Sustainability return on invested capital, and settling public concerns. Apart from highlighting the key challenges
associated with nuclear energy and renewable energy sources while operating as an independent power
generation system, the present paper delineates the various aspects associated with integrated nuclear-
renewable energy systems. It may be speculated that integrating nuclear energy and renewable energy
into a single hybrid energy system, coupled through informatics linkages, would enable to overcome the
demerits present when they operate individual.
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction: the energy question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

2. Challenges for renewable energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
2.1. Scalability, commercialisation, and timeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
2.2. Material input requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
2.3. Intermittency and land foot print . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
2.4. Compatibility and technological barriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
2.5. Ecological issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
3. Challenges for nuclear energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
3.1. Economic and financial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
3.2. Safety and security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
3.3. Waste disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
3.4. Research needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
3.5. Public perception and opinion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
4. Hybrid nuclear-renewable energy systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
4.1. Types of hybrid system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
4.2. Aspects of interconnections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
4.3. Benefits of hybrid energy systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
4.4. Economics, status, and challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
5. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176

E-mail address: siddharthhuman@gmail.com.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.262
0959-6526/© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 S. Suman / Journal of Cleaner Production 181 (2018) 166e177
1. Introduction: the energy question
Energy is an intangible currency essential for sustaining the life.
More than one billion people are expected to be added in coming 15
years, making world population about 8.5 billion in 2030 (Melorose
et al., 2015). Energy consumption is anticipated to increase by 34
percent till 2035. Nearly one-third of expected increase in the en-
ergy consumption will be the result of rapidly rising global popu-
lation and world economy. The major portion of the global energy
demand is achieved from the conventional sources of energy for
long. It is forecasted that conventional fuels will remain the central
source of energy driving the global economyd satiating approxi-
mately 60 percent of the energy consumption increase and ac-
counting for around 80 percent of total energy consumption in
2035; as illustrated in Fig. 1 (British Petroleum, 2017). Although coal
slows and renewables advance in the next two decades, the in-
crease in combined contribution of oil and gas in global energy
production will follow trend similar to that of the last two decades.
The trend of overdependence on fossil fuels for energy production
is threatening the sustainability of life itself. Fossil fuels are not only
unevenly distributed and depleting fast but also tampering the
ecological balance necessary for existence (Upadhyay and Sharma,
2014). Climate change and energy security have emerged as the
biggest concerns of the present century. It is now well accepted that
unless far-reaching steps are taken to moderate global warming,
economic development will be slowing and world could move to-
wards human made environmental disaster (Apergis et al., 2010;
Menyah and Wolde-Rufael, 2010; Sudhakara Reddy and Assenza,
2009; The Stern Review on the Economic Effects of Climate Change,
2006). The presence of a huge share of fossil energy sources in
unstable region of the Middle East poses risks and raises concerns
for different nations in terms of the dependability of energy supply
and pricing (Gnansounou, 2008). Ecological challenges and con-
cerns about energy security are compelling many nations to explore
energy options other than fossil fuels. Both nuclear energy and
renewable energydvirtually carbon-free energy sourcesdhave
emerged as promising solutions for ecological degradation and
energy security problems. Consequently, many countries have
started investing in nuclear and renewable energies as a means to
a) reduce dependency on crude oil trade, b) ensure better energy
security, c) curtail the price instability associated with foreign fossil
fuels, and d) mitigate ecological degradation (Toth and Rogner,
2006; Vaillancourt et al., 2008). Few countriesd which were un-
certain about nuclear energy in the pastd are also displaying a lot
of inclination for developing nuclear reactors now in order to
diversify sources of energy supplies, strengthen energy security,
and deliver a carbon free alternative to conventional fuels
Fig. 1. Change in contribution of different sources in global energy production.
167
(Adamantiades and Kessides, 2009). There are currently 447 nu-
clear power plants in operation worldwide and 287 new ones are
coming on line (including 28 in Japan) by 2035 (“World Nuclear
Association,” n.d.). However, the future of energy is not so bright.
Nuclear and renewable energies have their own issues. Renewable
energy is not continuous, dependent upon geographical location
and climatic conditions, and it requires a very large land footprint.
Even though nuclear energy is a proven technology for generating
electricity, many environmental groups and public have considered
it unattractive since long. Such unfavourable attitudes and appre-
hensions are due to the possibility of accidents leading to melt-
down of nuclear reactors. Meltdown of reactors has catastrophic
social and environmental impacts. Lack of clear policies and regu-
lations regarding the disposal of radioactive nuclear waste, and risk
of fissile nuclear fuel being used for destructive purposes if diverted
to radical groups add fuel to public fear (Adamantiades and
Kessides, 2009).
There are drawbacks and risks associated with any power gen-
eration method. A sense of optimisation among energy wants,
economic growth, safety, and sustainability has to be struck since
each type of energy source has its own trade-offs. In light of reaping
the benefits of both nuclear energy and renewable energy sources
by attenuating their individual demerits, a new nuclear-renewable
integrated energy system has been at the forefront of the wider
issue of the energy debate. The objectives of the present article are
to briefly highlight the drawbacks and challenges associated with
both nuclear and renewable energy systems while operating in-
dependent and critically evaluate the hybrid renewable-nuclear
energy systems. Renewable energy systems are seldom ques-
tioned while integrated nuclear-renewable energy systems are
relatively new phenomenon; that is why it is expected that this
review article will provide crucial understanding and contribute to
the ongoing debate of sustainability.
2. Challenges for renewable energy
Renewable energy is the energy obtained from natural and
persistent flows of energy occurring in the immediate environment
(Twidell and Weir, 2015). Presently, power generation using
renewable sources of energy stands well poised to fulfil new elec-
tricity requirement of the world. Renewable energy daccelerated
by policies and strategies directed at reducing environmental
degradation and enhancing energy security with sustainabilityd
expanded at its fastest rate to date in 2014 and presently contrib-
utes above 45 percent of total energy additions. Extensive deploy-
ment of renewables continues to excel in energy-starved emerging
economy and few nations such as China and India have ambitious
plan. Furthermore, rapid progress in technology, growth of newer
markets with better resources, and strengthening of financing
scenario by government policies are enabling more cost-effective
installation of dynamic renewable technologies like solar photo-
voltaics, solar-thermal plant, and onshore wind worldwide
(International Energy Agency, 2015). However, there are various
issues and challenges associated with it as discussed in subsequent
sub-sections.
2.1. Scalability, commercialisation, and timeline
Scalability refers to the capability of a system or source to
accommodate surge in production or number of users without a
penalty in cost, performance, reliability or functionality. Alternative
energy sources must be scalable within a fixed time frame at a
competitive cost in order to be primarily dependent on them for
power generation. Various non-conventional energy sources like
thin-film solar, algae-based diesel, cellulosic ethanol etc. have been
168 S. Suman / Journal of Cleaner Production 181 (2018) 166e177
successfully verified at the small scale, however, such laboratory-
scale verifications do not speak about the potential for applica-
bility of these technologies for energy production at a large scale.
Another concern is about taking the science from laboratory to the
market or the question of time gap in which the proposed alter-
native source of energy will get commercialised completely. Any
power generation technology takes lot of efforts and time to see the
light of the marketd procedures require to be standardised and
optimised, grant for patents are filled, pilot or trial plants are
constructed and appraised, and their ecological impacts are eval-
uated. The typical time frame between laboratory demonstration of
feasibility and full large-scale commercialisation of power pro-
duction is 20e25 years (Kirpotin, 2012). In the meantime, the en-
ergy requirement dynamics change and the exponentially piled up
energy demand is tried to fulfil with conventional sources, thus
making a vicious circle.
2.2. Material input requirements
Renewable energy sources are not only about high initial capital
investment but also resources and materials for the sustained
growth of its infrastructure. The type and quantity of the raw ma-
terials required may even limit scalability, affect the cost, com-
mercialisation, and feasibility of any alternative energy source.
Uninterrupted supply of rare-earth materials to support the
emerging technologies relevant to energy is particularly important.
For example, palladium, platinum, and rare-earth materials are
needed for the manufacturing of fuel cells. Indium and gallium are
required for solar-photovoltaic technology. Lithium is an integral
component of advanced batteries. Rare-earths material like gallium
and indium are required even for energy saving technology, such as
organic light-emitting diode or light-emitting diode. In case of large
scale integration of such energy alternatives, there will be a huge
stress to obtain these rare-earth materials. Thin-film solar, for
example, has been endorsed as a highly cost effective, more flexible,
and with wider applicability for solar to electricity conversion
compared with older silicon panel technology. Thin-film solar
technology utilises indium due to its unique characteristics at
present, however, it is also extensively used as an element of flat-
screen display monitors. There are limited known reserves of in-
dium, and a report based on study conducted in 2007 predicted
that at present rate of consumption, it would last just for thirteen
years more (Cohen, 2007). A recent study has also suggested that
shortage of minerals used in electric car batteries including indium,
gallium, and lithium could trigger trade wars (Ferre
et al., 2002).
Table 1 provides an estimation of raw materials demand for sus-
taining emerging technologies relevant to energy generation
globally (Marscheider-Weidemann et al., 2016). In order to match
Table 1
Global demand of raw materials for emerging technologies relevant to energy generation.
Raw material Fraction of world production in 2013
2013 2035
Gallium 0.30 0.40
Neodymium 0.80 1.70
Indium 0.30 0.50
Scandium 0.20 1.40
Platinum 0.00 0.60
Cobalt 0.00 0.90
Palladium 0.10 0.50
Copper 0.10 0.30
Selenium 0.00 0.11
Ruthenium 0.00 0.03
such a huge surge in the requirement of rare-earth materials, there
is a need of finding new deposits or sources of these acute metals.
Moreover, novel techniques for excavating the rare elements from
various types of rocks are pressing need as extraction techniques of
rare metals are not fully standardised and recognised yet (Ferre

et al., 2002).
2.3. Intermittency and land foot print
Renewable energy sources are dependent upon geographical
location, climatic conditions, and require a very large land footprint.
Moreover, they do not produce power consistently and continu-
ously. However, the need of present world is continuous power. The
present world cannot do with varying or fluctuating electricity, that
too at the cost of large land footprint. Irregularity of renewable
energy sources such as solar and wind poses a key hurdle to their
extensive integration with the present grid infrastructure (Rugolo
and Aziz, 2012). Capacity factordaverage percentage of time for
which any power plant is operating at its full rated capacity
annually dis a quantitative indication of challenges due to inter-
mittency in electricity generation. As mentioned in Table 2, capacity
factor of solar photovoltaic systems is only 12e19 percent and it is
around 30 percent for wind systems. In contrast, a nuclear power
plant generates electricity with a capacity factor of more than 90
percent which is comparable to a coal-thermal power plant (70e90
percent) in the United States (Kirpotin, 2012). Moreover, the land
requirement and other key data based on sustainability and
economical-environmental indicators for power generation (pro-
vided in Table 3) reveal that renewable energy sources have enor-
mous challenges before becoming the chief power generating
source (Brook and Bradshaw, 2015). For instance, almost 50 percent
of the total energy need of United States could be fulfilled utilising
renewable energy technologies if these are properly developed and
realised, however, approximately 17 percent of the United States’
land resource would be needed for it (Pimentel et al., 2002).
Table 2
Typical capacity factors for power generation.
Type of power generation Capacity factor (%)
Photovoltaics 12e19
Solar thermal ~15
Solar thermal with storage 70e75
Wind 20e40
Hydropower 30e80
Geothermal 70e90
Nuclear reactor 60e100
Coal thermal 70e90
Emerging technologies relevant to energy generation
Thin-layer photovoltaics, white LEDs
Permanent magnets, laser technology
Thin-layer photovoltaics
Solid oxide fuel cells
Fuel cells, catalyst
Lithium-ion batteries, synthetic fuels
Seawater desalination
Efficient electric motors
Thin-layer photovoltaics
Dye-sensitised solar cells
 S. Suman / Journal of Cleaner Production 181 (2018) 166e177 169

Table 3
Data and relative ranking of power generation options on sustainability and economiceenvironmental impact indicators.

Indicator (per TWh) Coal Natural gas Nuclear Biomass Hydro Wind Solar (PV)
(onshore)

value rank value rank value rank value rank value rank value rank value rank

GHG emissions (t CO2) 1001000 7 469000 6 16000 3 18000 4 4000 1 12000 2 46000 5
Electricity cost ($ US) 100.1 4 65.6 1 108.4 5 111 6 90.3 3 86.6 2 144.3 7
Dispatchability A 1 A 1 A 1 B 4 B 4 C 6 C 6
Land use (km2) 2.1 3 1.1 2 0.1 1 95 7 50 6 46 5 5.7 4
Safety (fatalities) 161 7 4 5 0.04 1 12 6 1.4 4 0.15 2 0.44 3
Solid waste (t) 58600 7 NA 1 NA 1 9170 6 NA 1 NA 1 NA 1
Radiotoxic waste mid 6 low 3 high 7 low 3 trace 1 trace 1 trace 1
Weighted rank e 6.0 e 2.0 e 1.3 e 6.7 e 3.3 e 2.3 e 5.3

2.4. Compatibility and technological barriers 2.5. Ecological issues

Since renewable energy sources are intermittent in nature with
relatively low capacity factor (see Table 2), the prerequisites to
transport this fluctuating electricity are extensive. Variable nature
of renewable energy sources constrains its integration with con-
ventional grids for transportation of produced electricity. Even
though concepts like smart gridd an electrical network which is
intelligent enough to increase efficacy, flexibility, sustainability,
dependability and safety of an electrical system by monitoring and
controlling the grid with help of automation and full integration
(Kabalci, 2016; Tuballa and Abundo, 2016)dor energy storage (Ho
et al., 2016; Speidel and Bra €unl, 2016) are attempting to resolve
the substitutability issue, these concepts have their own problems
(Colak et al., 2016; Kim et al., 2016; Kyriakopoulos and Arabatzis,
2016). (Colak et al., 2016) conducted a detailed survey of the crit-
ical challenges in smart grids in terms of information and
communication technologies, sensing, measurement, control and
automation technologies, power electronics and energy storage
technologies. It was reported that the information and communi-
cation technologies of smart grids face the challenges of deliberate
attacks caused by industrial espionage and terrorists as well as the
inadvertent compromises due to user errors and equipment fail-
ures. The design, deployment and maintenance challenges in smart
metering, how to design demand management and control, the
uncertainties in the generation profile of distributed and renewable
generation resources and the unbalance between user re-
quirements and energy saving in energy management systems are
few key challenges in control and automation technologies of smart
grids (Kim et al., 2016) argued that, apart from the development in
the technologies, it is necessary to build up an active policy plan for
the dissemination of the smart grid. It is also required to reform
current electric pricing systems in order for the smart grid to induce
a decrease in electricity consumption. A strong scheme for publicity
and information on the smart grid is necessary to maximise its
reduction effect on electricity consumption. Renewable energy also
has compatibility issues with present infrastructure and to tap its
benefits to the maximum, advanced technology and/or new infra-
structure erection are required which in turn exponentially in-
crease the capital and land footprint (Shaker et al., 2016; Urzúa
et al., 2016). For example, in spite of ethanol being capable of get-
ting blend with gasoline and used directly, it is not possible to
transport ethanol through existing pipeline infrastructure as it is
highly susceptible to absorb water and has much higher oxygen
content. Developing an alternative pipeline infrastructure for its
transportation and increasing its usage would require technological
advancement and huge cost (Sorate and Bhale, 2015).
Renewable energy sources are subjected to few subtle hurdles
which prove more detrimental to ecosystem in comparison to
degradation caused by conventional sources at many instances.
Renewable resources are considered to be inexhaustible based on
the reasoning that these can be recycled, but it should not mean
that these are practically infinite and do not undergo degradation
(Nuclear Energy in a Sustainable Development Perspective, 2000).
Even renewable resources, for example land, water, air, are
vulnerable to stresses because of various practices which may be
irreversible. Water and air are vulnerable to contaminants due to
simplicity with which they can be used as free resources for
receiving and dispersing waste. Similarly, land which acts as habitat
for various animal and plant species is extremely sensitive to
environmental degradation, and can be destroyed easily. Thus,
renewable resources need to be perceived as finite, susceptible to
stresses and degradation. Such degradation is intricately associated
with public perspective for any energy sources to be accepted fully.
For example, in spite of the advantages of hydroelectric power
plant, it is also found to be the reason of various environmental
problems. The stored water often encroaches valuable fertile land
and alluvial bottomland. Furthermore, dams affect the existing
species like aquatic plants, fishes, microbes, and many others in the
ecosystem (Ligon et al., 1995; Pimentel et al., 2002). Tampering of
ecosystem by dams may significantly reduce the fish species in
river systems (Brown and Bauer, 2009). In case of wind farm,
installing the wind turbines in or in vicinity of flying path of
migrating bird species or other wildlife may cause their collision
with the rotating blades or supporting infrastructure. The total
wind turbines erected in the United States only has caused death of
around 300 birds per year (Kerlinger et al., 2010). Rotation of wind
turbine produces high decibel noise and this is unavoidable prob-
lem of its functioning (Katinas et al., 2016). The emergency release
or accidental leakage of toxic chemicals utilised in the heat transfer
or storage system of solar-thermal power plant is also seen as po-
tential environmental hazards. Decline in water level may also be a
cause of concern especially in arid regions (Pimentel et al., 2002).
The use of poisonous compounds, such as cadmium sulfide and
gallium arsenide, in the manufacturing of solar-photovoltaic sys-
tems is a major environmental problem (Bradley, 1998). Since these
highly toxic substances remain in the environment for years,
dumping and recycling of non-functional solar-photovoltaic cells
present a major challenge. Even in the case of biofuel, there is a
debate on the use of land resources for food or fuel since long.
High initial capital investment along with risks associated with
it is a major obstacle for big utilities in order to enter the market
aggressively. Dramatic dips in conventional fuel prices in past years
170 S. Suman / Journal of Cleaner Production 181 (2018) 166e177

have also raised concerns regarding the competitiveness of alter-
native sources. For growing markets, policies and regulations,
financing conditions and grid infrastructure can present obstacles
to growth. What will be the fate of renewabled will falter or could
a rapid expansion can take placedonly time can dispel the cloud.
3. Challenges for nuclear energy
Nuclear power plants are capable of providing consistent and
carbon-free base-load electricity. These plants do not discharge any
greenhouse gas during operation and comparatively require very
less land footprint, see Table 3. Presently, nuclear power plants fulfil
over 11 per cent of the world's electricity demand and there are
more than 60 nuclear reactors under construction in various
countries at present (Suman et al., 2016; 2015b). In spite of being a
proven technology and an attractive option for power generation in
order to progress towards a green world, nuclear reactors have not
progressed rapidly and accepted widely because of various issues
and challenges. Some of the major challenges are as follows:
Fukushima, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island are often cited in
order to build public apprehensions or opinion regarding the safety
issues. The Fukushima nuclear accident on March 11, 2011 in Japan
has severely dented the prospects of growth of civilian nuclear
power in many countries, Table 4 reflects the changes made in
nuclear policy by different countries after Fukushima. The claim of
nuclear power industry made in last decade about next generation
nuclear reactor to be ‘inherently safe’ has died down. Design of
latest generation of nuclear reactors are still susceptible to release
of radioactive fuel to environment because of accidents, sabotage or
radical attack. Use of recycled radioactive fuel for next generation of
reactors, which lot of pro-nuclear scientist still advocate, would
increase the risk of fissionable fuel being misused to develop nu-
clear weapons. Moreover, the distrust and fear triggered by a nu-
clear catastrophe would threaten the sustainability of the whole
nuclear power technology (Kuramochi, 2015; Ming et al., 2016;
Podobnik, 2006; Srinivasan and Gopi Rethinaraj, 2013).
3.3. Waste disposal

3.1. Economic and financial
If nuclear power has to become dominant in quenching the
future energy-thirst, countries must erect new nuclear plants not
only as replacement of those on the verge of completing their
service time but also to considerably increase the number of
operational reactors. However, contrary to forecasts made by gov-
ernment and industrial experts few years back, cost of constructing
a new nuclear plant has risen steeply and it is huge compared to the
other low-carbon alternatives. Typically, the cost of any technology
decreases with increase in its production volume, scale factors, and
with passing of time due to technological learning. The unexpected
increase in the cost of erecting a nuclear plant has been understood
essentially as an exception that echoes the idiosyncrasies of the
regulatory mechanism influenced by worldwide growth in public
opposition, stringent regulations, and delayed construction period.
The need of colossal financial investment combined with concerns
involved in construction and delay in licensing too have escalated
the cost of commissioning nuclear plants (Chu and Majumdar,
2012; Hultman et al., 2007). Present average construction cost es-
timate of $9 billion per plant impedes the growth of nuclear as well
as threatens the financial investment viability of many companies
(Podobnik, 2006). Moreover, public perspective, policies and
regulation, and government initiatives are inclined to renewable
sources. Most often, cost of power produced from heavily sub-
sidised renewable energy is compared with nuclear energy.
3.2. Safety and security
Safetydprimarily in terms of effects of radiation on living ani-
mal and environmentdand security concerns about the attack by
terrorists as well as potential of non-civilian use of nuclear are the
key arguments used against nuclear energy. The mishaps at
Even though there is an on-site infrastructure in form of con-
crete casks to store the nuclear waste for the short period, having a
well charted plan for long-term disposal of radioactive nuclear
waste is crucial for the wide acceptance and substantial growth of
nuclear industry. Despite the hazards and risks posed by radio-
logical waste, no facility yet exists anywhere in the world for the
disposal of spent or decayed radioactive nuclear fuel and other
high-level radiological wastes. In spite of the fact that nuclear po-
wer industry is six decade mature, there is not even a single long-
term waste repository licensed by any nation. Even after spending
more than $13.5 billion of taxpayers, one such proposed long-term
waste repository at Yucca Mountain site in Nevada has been
impaired because of political, technical, and managerial problems
(Beswick et al., 2014; Podobnik, 2006). With the advancement of
relevant technology, few alternative ways like deep borehole
disposal are emerging but they are far from realisation at present
(Beswick et al., 2014).
3.4. Research needs
There are various aspects of nuclear power demanding re-
searchers’ attention, ranging from developing new inherently safe
reactor to designing a secure waste management system. To gain
insight into next generation of nuclear reactors, may be based on
fusion rather than fission, there are needs to invest both in basic
research and infrastructure required for the research. Developing
novel materials which can withstand the harsh environment of
nuclear reactor coredcombination of high irradiation fluence or
energy, high temperatures, and pressuresd pose a major challenge
to materials scientist. Presence of limited facility for understanding
the effects of high fluence irradiation on materials worldwide is one
of the significant technological limitations in developing the
structural materials for next generation nuclear reactors as well as

Table 4
Changes in nuclear policy post-Fukushima.

Core agenda Country

Expansion Using and also constructing new reactors USA, Russia, China, France, India
Using and plan to construct new reactors Mexico, Brazil
No operational plant but constructing reactors Chile, Egypt
No operational plant but plan to build reactors Iran
Status quo Using with no new plant construction Japan, Spain
Phase-out Using but slowly going to decommission all Germany, Belgium, Switzerland
Phase-down Using but planning to restrict the numbers Sweden
 S. Suman / Journal of Cleaner Production 181 (2018) 166e177
for concept of fusion energy. The number of research reactors
having fast fluence fission facility is decreasing and there is no high
flux neutron irradiation facility for fusion reactors (Ekins, 2004;
Zinkle and Was, 2013). In addition, even expanding the present
nuclear power reactors would require the construction of many
new uranium fuel enrichment plants as well as infrastructure for
spent fuel repositories (Podobnik, 2006).
3.5. Public perception and opinion
Post Fukushima, public acceptance has become a key factor in
the process of nuclear technology deployment. The immediate
aftermath of the Fukushima disaster witnessed dramatic shifts in
public opinion. In a poll conducted across 23 countries after
Fukushima, only 22 percent was in the favour of nuclear energy
expansion while 30 percent asked for an immediate shutdown. In
another poll conducted in Franced which derives around three-
fourths of its electricity from nuclear power reactorsdmore than
77 percent of the sample responses wished for either rolling down
or immediate shut down of the nuclear power plants. More or less,
globally similar public opinion has played a crucial role in dramatic
change in energy policies adopted by governments or regulatory
agencies. Perhaps the most appalling decision was taken by Ger-
many to shut down the seven of their older nuclear power reactors
immediately and to phase out the other nine nuclear reactors by
2022. The federal council of Switzerland, a country which is
dependent on nuclear reactors for almost 40 percent of its elec-
tricity, decided for a slow decommissioning of nuclear reactors in
May 2011. It has planned to shut down the first nuclear power plant
by 2019 and completely become independent of nuclear reactors by
2034 (Birmingham Policy Commission, 2012). Strong and unre-
mitting protest for a long period by the People's Movement Against
Nuclear Energy (PMANE) organisation against Kudankulam nuclear
power plant, India also reflects the attitude of common people
worldwide towards nuclear power. Similar sentiments were
echoed in other countries too (Erto € r-Akyazı et al., 2012; Tampakis
et al., 2013). In a broad sense, the breach of public trust after
Fukushima accident is anticipated to cause deceleration of nuclear
power plants expansion worldwide for long.
4. Hybrid nuclear-renewable energy systems
Use of renewable energy technologies at local or household
level can immensely contribute to socio-economic development of
any nation. For example, solar heater for household purposes or
drying of agricultural products, solar lamp for night school, solar
cooker for cooking, mini wind turbine for pumping drinking water
or irrigating farm, biogas for decentralised cooking or electricity
and many more applications can enrich the quality of life drastically
even in rural and remote areas not connected to grid (Flavin and
Hull Aeck, 2005). The use of solar power in routine activities is
also being promoted (Suman et al., 2015a). However, fluctuating or
intermittent nature of renewable causes lack of its compatibility
with present electrical grid infrastructure and poses serious con-
cerns over its deep penetration and large-scale power generation.
Table 5
Examples of integrated nuclear-renewable system.
Energy sources Coupling method
Nuclear Wind energy Electrical
Nuclear Solar energy Thermal
Nuclear Biomass Thermal
Nuclear Geothermal Thermal
Nuclear Wind energy and natural gas Electrical and thermal
171
Nuclear power is a reliable carbon-less base-load electricity
generation source. Although, it was concluded in a recent study
that Fukushima could have been prevented with effective nuclear
regulatory system and accidents like this are unlikely in a country
with strict regulatory mechanism (Wang et al., 2013); anti-nuke
policies and public opinion over safety and waste disposal are the
biggest hurdle for its expansion.
Perhaps, the global energy demand would not be achieved by
nuclear alone, but it may not be get achieved without it (Abu-
Khader, 2009). A future pathway for the global energy mix that
emphasises only renewable resources and opposes the large-scale
deployment of nuclear power will inevitably increase negative
economic and environmental impacts (Hong et al., 2015). Despite
its controversial reputation, nuclear power is sustainable, efficient
and reliable, and various studies argued that it must be part of the
energy mix (Augutis et al., 2015; Brook et al., 2014). Formulating an
integrated methodologydcombining technical, economical, and
energy security perspectivesd to evaluate the optimal share of
various energy sources, Augutis et al. (Augutis et al. (2015) reported
that share of renewable sources should be 50 percent while nuclear
technology should contribute 30 percent to the total energy pro-
duction; remaining should be derived from natural gas. Strong
social acceptance of renewable sources and higher steady rate
operation of nuclear reactors can be combined in hybrid energy
systems to overcome the issues associated with their independent
use.
4.1. Types of hybrid system
Depending upon various factors like geographical, economical,
desired form of output etc. different renewable energy sources may
be coupled to form a nuclear-renewable hybrid energy system;
Table 5 mentions few of the possible integrated systems (Keller,
2011; Richard et al., 2011; Ruth et al., 2014).
Fig. 2 shows a hybrid nuclear-solar power plant based on the
patented technology of Keller (2011). It uses a nuclear reactor to
heat a compressed working fluid that is expanded within turbines
rotating compressors of both reactor plant and air pressurising
plant. Heat exchangers are used to extract low-grade heat from the
working fluid and transfer to the moisture removal equipment
located in downstream side of air compressing plant. In addition,
inter cooler heat exchangers are used to further cool the working
fluid prior to entry into the compressors, thereby reducing
compressor power needs. A regenerative heat exchanger is used to
pre-heat the working fluid before its re-entry into the reactor by
extracting low grade heat from the working fluid discharged from
the turbines. In another few studies (Borissova, 2015; Popov and
Borissova, 2017a; 2017b), a new type of hybrid nuclear-solar po-
wer plant having small modular nuclear reactor and concentrated
solar-thermal plant is analysed. In this proposed hybrid energy
system, the solar heat is transferred to nuclear steam to raise its
temperature. Continuous superheating is provided through ther-
mal energy storage. The results from design point calculations
show that solar superheating has the potential to increase nuclear
plant electric efficiency significantly, pushing it to around 37.5%.
Storage method Possible outputs
Hydrogen Electricity, hydrogen
Thermal Electricity, heat
Chemical Electricity, biofuels
Thermal Electricity, heat
Chemical Electricity, chemical products, synfuel
172 S. Suman / Journal of Cleaner Production 181 (2018) 166e177
Fig. 2. Hybrid nuclear-solar energy system.
Solar heat to electricity conversion efficiency reaches unprece-
dented rates of 56.2%, approaching the effectiveness of the modern
combined cycle gas turbine plants. In addition, substantial decrease
of solar island investment cost is reported. Fig. 3 illustrates a hybrid
nuclear-geothermal energy system patented recently (Richard
et al., 2011). This hybrid energy system includes a geothermal
system having a power plant, a pumping station, and a nuclear
plant. Pumping station is used to inject fluid from reservoir through
an injection well into the bedrock or hot dry rock zone which is
sucked up through a secondary bore or extraction well coupled
with conventional steam power plant. As fluid is injected into the
bedrock, drop in temperature occurs due to heat transfer to the
fluid, and this drop is compensated with the help of nuclear reactor
whose core is positioned within bores in the hot dry rock zone.
Another concept of wind farm integrated with a hybrid small
modular reactor-biomass having a hydrogen production is recently
developed (Papaioannou et al., 2014). The nuclear unit produces
thermal power at its full capacity continuously and there is a pro-
vision of switching its heat output between the generation of steam
for electricity production and biomass production unit. The inte-
grated nuclear-wind energy system is operated in accordance with
electricity demand, that is the sum of their electrical output is
enough to satisfy the variation of electricity need. The hydrogen
production unit needs electricity and operates on the surplus po-
wer generated during the peak wind farm performance.
4.2. Aspects of interconnections
It is expected that proposed nuclear-renewable hybrid systems
will continue to operate component technologies similarly to how
they have been operated independently. Thus, key technical issues
will involve interconnections and few additional system issues due
to the complexity of integration. Fig. 4 mentions some of the
important interconnections and challenges they pose (Ruth et al.,
2014).
Thermal interconnections are at heart of nuclear-renewable
energy system in order to efficiently use the generated heat dur-
ing low demand of electricity. Thermal energy storage reservoirs
may be needed to soften the imposition of rapid transitions on the
thermal hydraulics systems. Additionally, new remote flow moni-
toring system, control valves and pumps for high-temperature
thermal hydraulic fluids, gases, molten salts, liquid metals, and
ultra-supercritical steam will be needed. High-temperature heat
circulation in aggressive environments associated with high-
temperature steam, molten salts, and gases requires validation of
metallurgy and possibly new heat-exchanger fabrication tech-
niques (Adee and Guizzo, 2010). Research and development is also
required to make hybrid energy systems respond rapidly, effi-
ciently, and safely to electricity market signals. Successful elec-
tricity interaction will need development of advanced,
interconnected sensing and informatics systems which identify all
the needs and provide information to the control systems, thus
enabling control systems to optimise profitability. In addition,
advanced power electronics are necessary. They need to be of low
cost, highly responsive, durable, and are able to switch between
multiple uses without disruption to operations (Ruth et al., 2014).
Production of hydrogen is also crucial for future energy systems
since it has many possible uses. High-temperature electrolysis
might provide a better interface for combining nuclear with re-
newables in a hybrid energy system because wind and solar
photovoltaic systems generate electricity directly. This allows for
the possibility of utilising heat from a nuclear reactor and most or
all of the electricity from renewable sources. One such possible
hydrogen interconnection is shown in Fig. 5 (Orhan et al., 2012).
Few other studies (Al-Zareer et al., 2017; Ozcan and Dincer, 2016)
have also been reported on nuclear energy based integrated system
for hydrogen production and their thermodynamic modelling
shown good efficiency.
 S. Suman / Journal of Cleaner Production 181 (2018) 166e177 173

Fig. 3. Hybrid nuclear-geothermal energy system.

4.3. Benefits of hybrid energy systems
The proposed integrated nuclear-renewable energy systems can
offer a lot of advantages, few of them are as follows (Bragg-Sitton
et al., 2014):

Greenhouse gas emission will be reduced and the phenomenon
of global warming can be mitigated.

Helps in making renewable energy highly competitive and
cleanly extends green energy for generations.

Intermittent renewable energy can have high grid penetration
by renovating the grid infrastructure to provide grid-scale en-
ergy storage and dispatch.

Setting out of advanced integration via smart control and heat
management technologies will enable increased energy con-
version efficiency.
174 S. Suman / Journal of Cleaner Production 181 (2018) 166e177

Fig. 4. Different possible ways of interaction for nuclear-renewable systems.

Fig. 5. Schematic of nuclear-assisted solar-hydrogen generation.

Economical, highly reliable supply of electricity and consistent
Hybrid energy systems are capable of producing biofuel, synfuel
power can be generated in addition of other supplementary or hydrogen which can reduce the dependence of the trans-
services to the grid. portation sector on fossil fuels.
 S. Suman / Journal of Cleaner Production 181 (2018) 166e177

Overcomes the unease and psychological fear associated with
nuclear power by going hand in hand with renewable energy
having high public support.
It is important to emphasise here that few of the advantages
mentioned for hybrid system are similar to the individual energy
generation system; however, the big leap comes in terms of over-
coming intermittency of renewable energy and attenuate adverse
public opinion about nuclear. Efficiency of the integrated nuclear-
renewable systems also get increased drastically. Moreover, it also
helps in not stressing any particular resource's infrastructure
beyond the threshold level in a given timeframe, and thus keep
pricing and other factors in control. For example, if only solar-
photovoltaic is used, the rare-earth materials like cadmium used
in its manufacturing can distort the market dynamics.
4.4. Economics, status, and challenges
Apart from environmental concerns, commercialisation of any
energy system is crucially dependent upon return on investment
within a timeframe. Sabharwall et al. (2015) concluded thatd on
comparing the economics of three cases: nuclear power plant, in-
tegrated nuclear-wind facility, and a nuclear-wind system with
hydrogen production facilitydafter optimisation nuclear, wind,
and hydrogen production could lead to faster returns on
Fig. 6. Status of hybrid nuclear-renewable energy systems.
175
investment, thus making nuclear-renewable hybrid energy systems
an economically attractive option for the future.
Even though, recently hybrid solar and gas power plant began
operation in Germany, the hybrid nuclear-renewable energy sys-
tems are in its nascent stage. Despite the fact that various nuclear-
renewable systems are under different stages of development at
present, a common status of them may be described as shown in
Fig. 6. Presently, search of funding and partners are in progress for
most of them.
Consideration of energy generation routes having closely
coupled or integrated energy systems is not new; however, inte-
gration of nuclear and renewable sources in this way for achieving
the goal of sustainability, low carbon emissions, and energy secu-
rity is novel one. The paths of designing, developing, and deploying
a closely integrated nuclear-renewable energy system have various
trials waiting for. Broadly, these challenges may be categorised as
follows (Bragg-Sitton et al., 2014; Ruth et al., 2014; Sabharwall et al.,
2015):
Integration Value: There is a likelihood of increase in the cost of
components of the integrated energy systems. There will be an
extra risk or concern of increasing the efficiency and energy
accessibility, else the integrated nuclear-renewable system will not
be adopted and just will remain a concept. A flexible grid specific to
such integrated system should also be provided by market struc-
tures without looking for much profit in the beginning.
176 S. Suman / Journal of Cleaner Production 181 (2018) 166e177
Technological: An integrated energy system presents challenges
in interfacing multi-component of various subsystem. There is also
a need of developing cutting-edge equipment for controlling and
reliable power generation. Adaptation of these technologies with a
commercial readiness coupled with safety assessments will be also
the key for the success of integrated energy systems.
Financial: Such integrated energy systems require huge initial
investment overall and for that there is a need to develop a new
business model. Agreements regarding risk, profit and various
other issues need to be discussed between financers and operators
of the integrated energy system. Trends of energy market need to
be closely monitored and declaration regarding optimal capital
utilisation should be given.
Regulatory: Policy makers should recognise nuclear plants
alongside other utilities generating large amounts of wasted heat.
International cooperation programs involving both nuclear and
heat stakeholders should be encouraged (Leurent et al., 2017). Since
no such systems exist, there is a need to set up a new regulatory
board that will frame new policies and guidelines, and provide li-
cense for the operation. There may be the need for the involvement
of multiple regulatory agencies for each subsystem and their
interfacing. New regulations, re-regulation, or deregulation may be
needed for the electrical and various other energy establishments.
5. Conclusions
Nuclear-renewable hybrid energy systems are integrated facil-
ities comprised of nuclear reactors, renewable energy generation,
and industrial processes that can simultaneously address the need
for grid flexibility, greenhouse gas emission reductions, and
optimal use of investment capital. This review article summarises
various aspects of nuclear-renewable energy systems in detail,
apart from briefly highlighting the present scenario of energy
generation, and concerns associated with nuclear and renewable
energy sources while operating independently. Following conclu-
sions may be drawn based on the present study:

It may be speculated that integrating nuclear energy and
renewable energy into a single hybrid energy system, coupled
through informatics linkages, would enable to overcome the
demerits of these two carbon-free energy sources while oper-
ating as independent power generation system.

Renewables are intermittent but highly subsidised by funding
agencies and readily accepted by public while nuclear has high
capacity factor but little public trust at present. Evolving and
bringing these two energy generation routes together will not
only make power production continuous but also ease the ap-
prehensions of people reserved for nuclear.

Such hybrid systems provide alternative for the production of
other clean energy sources like hydrogen during off-peak
periods.
Even though fully integrated nuclear-renewable hybrid systems
have not yet been commercialised, the component technologies are
mature and waiting for funding opportunities to go for start-ups. In
order to commercialise hybrid energy systems, technical develop-
ment, systems analysis, and optimisation of the concepts are
necessary. However, the development of such systems is both a
technical and policy challenge because such hybrid energy systems
cut across the traditional corporate, government and regulatory
structures designed for single energy sources.
Acknowledgement
I sincerely acknowledge Michael F. Keller, President & CEO,
Hybrid Power Technologies LLC for providing the extended sum-
mary of their technology, and Mark F Ruth, Principal Project Lead e
Integrated Energy System Model, National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, USA for allowing to use various concepts and extending
unconditional support needed to carry out the present work.
References
Abu-Khader, M.M., 2009. Recent advances in nuclear power: a review. Prog. Nucl.
Energy 51, 225e235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2008.05.001.
Adamantiades, A., Kessides, I., 2009. Nuclear power for sustainable development:
current status and future prospects. Energy Pol. 37, 5149e5166. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enpol.2009.07.052.
Adee, S., Guizzo, E., 2010. Reactors redux. IEEE Spectr 47, 25e32. https://doi.org/10.
1109/MSPEC.2010.5520624.
Al-Zareer, M., Dincer, I., Rosen, M.A., 2017. Performance analysis of a supercritical
water-cooled nuclear reactor integrated with a combined cycle, a Cu-Cl ther-
mochemical cycle and a hydrogen compression system. Appl. Energy 195,
646e658. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APENERGY.2017.03.046.
Apergis, N., Payne, J.E., Menyah, K., Wolde-Rufael, Y., 2010. On the causal dynamics
between emissions, nuclear energy, renewable energy, and economic growth.
Ecol. Econ. 69, 2255e2260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.06.014.
Augutis, J., Martisauskas, L., Krikstolaitis, R., 2015. Energy mix optimization from an
energy security perspective. Energy Convers. Manag. 90, 300e314. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.enconman.2014.11.033.
Beswick, A.J., Gibb, F.G.F., Travis, K.P., 2014. Deep borehole disposal of nuclear waste:
engineering challenges. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Energy 167, 47e66. https://doi.org/
10.1680/ener.13.00016.
Birmingham Policy Commission, 2012. The Future of Nuclear Energy in the UK 112.
Borissova, A., 2015. Analysis and synthesis of a hybrid nuclear-solar power plant.
BgNS Trans. 20, 58e61.
Bradley, R.L., 1998. Renewable energy: not cheap, not Green? Strateg. Plan. Energy
Environ 17, 15e21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10485236.1998.10530522.
Bragg-Sitton, S.M., Boardman, R., Ruth, M., Zinaman, O., Forsberg, C., 2014.
Rethinking the future grid: integrated nuclear renewable energy systems:
preprint. In: 9th Nucl. Plants Curr. Issues Symp. Mov. Forw.
British Petroleum, 2017. BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2017, British Petro-
leum. https://doi.org/http://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/en/corporate/pdf/
energy-economics/statistical-review-2017/bp-statistical-review-of-world-
energy-2017-full-report.pdf.
Brook, B.W., Alonso, A., Meneley, D.A., Misak, J., Blees, T., van Erp, J.B., 2014. Why
nuclear energy is sustainable and has to be part of the energy mix. Sustain.
Mater. Technol 1, 8e16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susmat.2014.11.001.
Brook, B.W., Bradshaw, C.J.A., 2015. Key role for nuclear energy in global biodiversity
conservation. Conserv. Biol. 29, 702e712. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12433.
Brown, L.R., Bauer, M.L., 2009. Effects of hydrologic infrastructure on flow regimes
of California's Central Valley rivers: implications for fish populations. River Res.
Appl. 26 n/a-n/a. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.1293.
Chu, S., Majumdar, A., 2012. Opportunities and challenges for a sustainable energy
future. Nature 488, 294e303. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11475.
Cohen, D., 2007. Earth's natural wealth: an audit. New Sci 34e41. https://doi.org/10.
1016/S0262-4079(07)61315e3.
Colak, I., Sagiroglu, S., Fulli, G., Yesilbudak, M., Covrig, C.-F., 2016. A survey on the
critical issues in smart grid technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 54,
396e405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.036.
Ekins, P., 2004. Step changes for decarbonising the energy system: research needs
for renewables, energy efficiency and nuclear power. Energy Pol. 32,
1891e1904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2004.03.009.
Erto €
€r-Akyazı, P., Adaman, F., Ozkaynak, B., Zenginobuz, Ü., 2012. Citizens' prefer-
ences on nuclear and renewable energy sources: evidence from Turkey. Energy
Pol. 47, 309e320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.04.072.
Ferre
, F., Via, A., Ausiello, G., Brannetti, B., Zanzoni, A., Helmer-Citterich, M., 2002.
Sustainable development and the exploitation of mineral and energy resources:
a review. Int. J. Earth Sci. 91, 723e745. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00531-002-
0267-x.
Flavin, C., Hull Aeck, M., 2005. Energy for development, the potential role of
renewable energy in metting the millennium development goals. REN21 Netw
4e39.
Gnansounou, E., 2008. Assessing the energy vulnerability: case of industrialised
countries. Energy Pol. 36, 3734e3744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.07.
004.
Ho, W.S., Macchietto, S., Lim, J.S., Hashim, H., Muis, Z.A., Liu, W.H., 2016. Optimal
scheduling of energy storage for renewable energy distributed energy genera-
tion system. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 58, 1100e1107. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2015.12.097.
Hong, S., Bradshaw, C.J.A., Brook, B.W., 2015. Global zero-carbon energy pathways
using viable mixes of nuclear and renewables. Appl. Energy 143, 451e459.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.006.
Hultman, N.E., Koomey, J.G., Kammen, D.M., 2007. What history can teach us about
the future costs of U.S. Nuclear power. Environ. Sci. Technol. 41, 2087e2094.
https://doi.org/10.1021/es0725089.
International Energy Agency, 2015. Renewable energy medium-term market report
 S. Suman / Journal of Cleaner Production 181 (2018) 166e177
2015. Market Anal. Forecasts 2020 Executive Summary 14. https://doi.org/
9789264243613.
Kabalci, Y., 2016. A survey on smart metering and smart grid communication.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 57, 302e318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.
114.
Katinas, V., Mar ciukaitis, M., Tamasauskiene,_ M., 2016. Analysis of the wind turbine
noise emissions and impact on the environment. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
58, 825e831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.140.
Keller, M.F., 2011. Hybrid Integrated Energy Production Process.
Kerlinger, P., Gehring, J.L., Erickson, W.P., Curry, R., Jain, A., Guarnaccia, J., 2010. Night
migrant fatalities and obstruction lighting at wind turbines in north America.
Wilson J. Ornithol. 122, 744e754. https://doi.org/10.1676/06-075.1.
Kim, S.T., Lim, B.I., Park, W.K., Kim, M.K., Son, S.-Y., 2016. An analysis on the effec-
tiveness of a smart grid test-bed project: the Korean case. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 59, 868e875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.309.
Kirpotin, S., 2012. The post carbon reader: managing the 21st Century's sustain-
ability crisis. Int. J. Environ. Stud. 69, 669e670. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00207233.2012.660752.
Kuramochi, T., 2015. Review of energy and climate policy developments in Japan
before and after Fukushima. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 43, 1320e1332.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.12.001.
Kyriakopoulos, G.L., Arabatzis, G., 2016. Electrical energy storage systems in elec-
tricity generation: energy policies, innovative technologies, and regulatory re-
gimes. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 56, 1044e1067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2015.12.046.
Leurent, M., Jasserand, F., Locatelli, G., Palm, J., Ra €m€ a, M., Trianni, A., 2017. Driving
forces and obstacles to nuclear cogeneration in Europe: lessons learnt from
Finland. Energy Pol. 107, 138e150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.04.025.
Ligon, F.K., Dietrich, W.E., Trush, W.J., 1995. Downstream ecological effects of dams.
Bioscience 45, 183e192. https://doi.org/10.2307/1312557.
Marscheider-Weidemann, F., Langkau, S., Hummen, T., Erdmann, L., Tercero
Espinoza, L., Angerer, G., Marwede, M., Benecke, S., 2016. Summary j Raw ma-
terials for emerging technologies 2016. DERA Rohstoffi nformationen 28 (13)
(S., Berlin).
Melorose, J., Perroy, R., Careas, S., 2015. World population prospects. United Nations
1, 587e592. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.
Menyah, K., Wolde-Rufael, Y., 2010. CO2 emissions, nuclear energy, renewable en-
ergy and economic growth in the US. Energy Pol. 38, 2911e2915. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.01.024.
Ming, Z., Yingxin, L., Shaojie, O., Hui, S., Chunxue, L., 2016. Nuclear energy in the
Post-Fukushima Era: research on the developments of the Chinese and
worldwide nuclear power industries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 58, 147e156.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.165.
Nuclear Energy in a Sustainable Development Perspective, 2000. http://www.
oecdnea.org/ndd/docs/2000/nddsustdev.pdf.
Orhan, M.F., Dincer, I., Rosen, M.A., Kanoglu, M., 2012. Integrated hydrogen pro-
duction options based on renewable and nuclear energy sources. Renew. Sus-
tain. Energy Rev. 16, 6059e6082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.06.008.
Ozcan, H., Dincer, I., 2016. Thermodynamic modeling of a nuclear energy based
integrated system for hydrogen production and liquefaction. Comput. Chem.
Eng. 90, 234e246.
Papaioannou, I.T., Purvins, A., Shropshire, D., Carlsson, J., 2014. Role of a hybrid
energy system comprising a small/medium-sized nuclear reactor and a biomass
processing plant in a scenario with a high deployment of onshore wind farms.
J. Energy Eng. 140, 4013005.
Pimentel, D., Herz, M., Glickstein, M., Zimmerman, M., Allen, R., Becker, K., Evans, J.,
Hussain, B., Sarsfeld, R., Grosfeld, A., Seidel, T., 2002. Renewable energy: current
and potential issues. Bioscience 52, 1111. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-
3568(2002)052[1111:RECAPI]2.0.CO;2.
Podobnik, B., 2006. Global energy shifts;: fostering sustainability in a turbulent age.
The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI).
Popov, D., Borissova, A., 2017a. Innovative configuration of a hybrid nuclear-solar
tower power plant. Energy 125, 736e746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.
2017.02.147.
177
Popov, D., Borissova, A., 2017b. Innovative configuration of a hybrid nuclear-
parabolic trough solar power plant. Int. J. Sustain. Energy 0, 1e24. https://doi.
org/10.1080/14786451.2017.1333509.
Richard, E., Mead, B., Zlotnikov, E., Park, H., Us, N.J., Haders, D., Nj, S., 2011. (12)
United States Patent. https://doi.org/10.1145/634067.634234.
Rugolo, J., Aziz, M.J., 2012. Electricity storage for intermittent renewable sources.
Energy Environ. Sci. 5, 7151e7160. https://doi.org/10.1039/C2EE02542F.
Ruth, M.F., Zinaman, O.R., Antkowiak, M., Boardman, R.D., Cherry, R.S.,
Bazilian, M.D., 2014. Nuclear-renewable hybrid energy systems: opportunities,
interconnections, and needs. Energy Convers. Manag. 78, 684e694. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.enconman.2013.11.030.
Sabharwall, P., Bragg-Sitton, S., Boldon, L., Blumsack, S., 2015. Nuclear renewable
energy integration: an economic case study. Electr. J. 28, 85e95. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.tej.2015.09.003.
Shaker, H., Zareipour, H., Wood, D., 2016. Impacts of large-scale wind and solar
power integration on California‫׳‬s net electrical load. Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 58, 761e774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.287.
Sorate, K.A., Bhale, P.V., 2015. Biodiesel properties and automotive system
compatibility issues. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 41, 777e798. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2014.08.079.
Speidel, S., Br€
aunl, T., 2016. Leaving the griddthe effect of combining home energy
storage with renewable energy generation. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 60,
1213e1224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.325.
Srinivasan, T.N., Gopi Rethinaraj, T.S., 2013. Fukushima and thereafter: reassessment
of risks of nuclear power. Energy Pol. 52, 726e736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enpol.2012.10.036.
Sudhakara Reddy, B., Assenza, G.B., 2009. The great climate debate. Energy Pol. 37,
2997e3008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.03.064.
Suman, S., Khan, M.K., Pathak, M., 2015a. Performance enhancement of solar
collectorsda review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 49, 192e210. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.087.
Suman, S., Khan, M.K.M.K., Pathak, M., Singh, R.N., Chakravartty, J.K., 2016. Rupture
behaviour of nuclear fuel cladding during loss-of-coolant accident. Nucl. Eng.
Des. 307, 319e327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2016.07.022.
Suman, S., Khan, M.K.M.K., Pathak, M., Singh, R.N., Chakravartty, J.K., 2015b.
Hydrogen in zircaloy: mechanism and its impacts. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 40,
5976e5994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.03.049.
Tampakis, S., Τsantopoulos, G., Arabatzis, G., Rerras, I., 2013. Citizens' views on
various forms of energy and their contribution to the environment. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 20, 473e482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.12.027.
The Stern Review on the Economic Effects of Climate Change, 2006. Popul. Dev. Rev.
32, 793e798. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2006.00153.x.
Toth, F.L., Rogner, H.-H., 2006. Oil and nuclear power: past, present, and future.
Energy Econ. 28, 1e25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2005.03.004.
Tuballa, M.L., Abundo, M.L., 2016. A review of the development of Smart Grid
technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 59, 710e725. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2016.01.011.
Twidell, J., Weir, T., 2015. Renewable Energy Resources. Taylor & Francis.
Upadhyay, S., Sharma, M.P., 2014. A review on configurations, control and sizing
methodologies of hybrid energy systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 38,
47e63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.05.057.
Urzúa, I.A., Olmedo, J.C., Sauma, E.E., 2016. Impact of intermittent non-conventional
renewable generation in the costs of the Chilean main power system. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 60, 810e821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.01.124.
Vaillancourt, K., Labriet, M., Loulou, R., Waaub, J.-P., 2008. The role of nuclear energy
in long-term climate scenarios: an analysis with the World-Times model. En-
ergy Pol. 36, 2296e2307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.01.015.
Wang, Q., Chen, X., Yi-chong, X., 2013. Accident like the Fukushima unlikely in a
country with effective nuclear regulation: literature review and proposed
guidelines. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 17, 126e146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2012.09.012.
World Nuclear Association. http://www.world-nuclear.org/(accessed 12.24.17).
Zinkle, S.J., Was, G.S., 2013. Materials challenges in nuclear energy. Acta Mater. 61,
735e758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2012.11.004.